Ecology and Society Ecology and Society
E&S Home > Vol. 22, Iss. 1 > Art. 28 > Abstract Open Access Publishing 
Improving participatory resilience assessment by cross-fertilizing the Resilience Alliance and Transition Movement approaches

My M Sellberg, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University
Sara T Borgström, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University; Department of Sustainable Development, Environmental Science and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH)
Albert V Norström, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University
Garry D Peterson, Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm University

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-09051-220128

Full Text: HTML   
Download Citation


Abstract

The concept of resilience is currently being widely promoted and applied by environmental and development organizations. However, their application of resilience often lacks theoretical backing and evaluation. This paper presents a novel cross-fertilization of two commonly used approaches for applying resilience thinking: the grassroots movement of Transition Towns and the Resilience Alliance’s Resilience Assessment. We compared these approaches through a text analysis of their key handbooks and combined them in a series of participatory workshops with a local partner active in the Transition Movement. Our results demonstrate that despite sharing a number of key features, these two approaches have complementary strengths and weaknesses. Strengths of the Transition Movement include its motivating overarching narrative of the need to transform in response to global sustainability challenges, as well as practical tools promoting learning and participation. The Resilience Assessment’s conceptual framework and structured process generated context-specific understanding of resilience, but provided little guidance on navigating transformation processes. Combining the Resilience Assessment’s theory on complex systems with the Transition Movement’s methods for learning also generated synergies in fostering complexity thinking. Based on these findings, we believe that integrating strengths from both approaches could be widely useful for practitioners seeking to apply resilience for sustainable development. Our study also highlights that methods for assessing resilience can be improved by combining insights from science and practice.

Key words

sustainability science; sustainable development; transdisciplinary research; transformation; Transition Towns

Copyright © 2017 by the author(s). Published here under license by The Resilience Alliance. This article  is under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.  You may share and adapt the work for noncommercial purposes provided the original author and source are credited, you indicate whether any changes were made, and you include a link to the license.

Top
Ecology and Society. ISSN: 1708-3087